Is Oxbridge no longer worth applying to?

[Ericasdog]

I have been meandering around the uni threads and am coming to the conclusion that Oxbridge universities are no longer worth applying to. I would like to have a conversation about whether my observations are correct.

Getting in - The process seems random and obfuscated. People apply in good faith only to be told that, in fact, they were applying just for one place on their course after all. Applicants with perfect credentials don't get interviewed whereas applicants with lower credentials do. Socio-demographics are a huge factor but nobody knows how they work. The process requires a lot of investment on the applicant's part, yet, seems whimsical on the part of the institution.

Getting out - The drive for state school recruitment has coincided exactly with big corporates going 'university 'blind' why is there this correlation now and what does it say about 'elite' institutions, two of the three top careers for Oxbridge grads are teaching and healthcare, yet, the workload is huge I'd want a career that I couldnt get from any other uni for the efforts, and the slightly eyebrow raising associations with certain alumni, staff and initiatives.

Thoughts?

There is of course the added factor that people who have been to expensive private schools may feel obliged to send their kids to similarly expensive schools, and will therefore feel a certain degree of pressure to pursue the kind of career that will enable them to facilitate this. Whereas people who have gone to Oxbridge from their local state comp will probably feel that they did well enough in the state system, and so they won't feel the same pressure to earn at a certain level so that they can educate their kids privately.

And given that the means of them getting there was education, it's perhaps not too surprising many may see that teaching (at all levels) is valuable.

And it is in any event an odd way to look at things, to conflate high aspirations and high earnings. If your aspiration is to become a university professor, is this a low aspiration compared to becoming a city banker, footballer, or Hollywood actor? Why are teaching and healthcare supposedly low aspiration careers? You could ask yourself why greed is apparently a high aspiration, if career choices are genuinely expected to be based solely on earnings?

Still, it’s a good sign if people who don’t enjoy making academic effort don’t make the effort to get into Oxford and Cambridge - sounds like the system is working to me!

Total rubbish and not worth commenting on.

My daughter did the Oxford route for 2020 entry. She did the UNIQ summer school for state school students in 2019, fell in love with the place and had to have it on her application. She did the physics PAT test to get to Oxford and got to interview stage. She didnt get in. Naturally she was gutted, but what helped was we had been to all the other uni choices on UCAS, so she knew those too were excellent unis she knew she would be happy at. She chose one of the other unis and shortly after the Oxford rejection we visited the uni and city again. This really helped her get over Oxford. And again in the August before her starting weeks later. Two years later, shes super happy and content where shes at and she excels in her subject and above target.

In answer to the question, is it worth applying to? Most definitely yes. She had 5 choices on UCAS, so to put one as Oxford was not going to hinder her too much. I also think the interview process and rejection also shaped her into the determined person she is. So personally I definitely think its worth trying for Oxbridge if the student really wants to go.

Not necessarily. I did an OU degree and in my course almost all the lecturers were also lecturing at Oxford and / or Cambridge and couple even at Harvard. Apparently this is not uncommon in some STEM fields / Business where the OU is as good or better that red bricks. Oxbridge use associate lecturers in the same way other unis do

This is true, but in my subject (Arts) I think Oxbridge (certainly Cambridge) give those associate lecturers an awful lot more time with students, and an awful lot more freedom to teach to their own specialisms, which is always going to be better quality teaching. So even if it's the same person doing the teaching, they may be able to teach better at Oxbridge simply because the system makes it easier to do so (even if they'd like to teach better elsewhere).

I think this is an interesting question.

I guess the answer is to apply but be realistic about the odds. Expectation management is the key.

The idea of Oxbridge gradsentering socially important roles such as teaching, medicine , nursing, care work and allied health profession roles is fantastic. We have great shortages in teaching and adult social care roles

As far as prestige is concerned there may a realignment in which universities do carry prestige given the number of capable candidates exceeds the number of Oxbridge places. Employers will cast their net wider and will be fully aware of excellent candidates elsewhere.

University blind application to my mind prevents an employer gaining a holistic view of a candidate (would you for instance hide A level results to prevent bias towards higher achieving candidates?)

If it works it works but it forces employers to be confident of their own recruitment processes. Also I am slightly wary of anything that could be construed as positive discrimination.

@mids2019

I think this is an interesting question.

I guess the answer is to apply but be realistic about the odds. Expectation management is the key.

The idea of Oxbridge gradsentering socially important roles such as teaching, medicine , nursing, care work and allied health profession roles is fantastic. We have great shortages in teaching and adult social care roles

As far as prestige is concerned there may a realignment in which universities do carry prestige given the number of capable candidates exceeds the number of Oxbridge places. Employers will cast their net wider and will be fully aware of excellent candidates elsewhere.

University blind application to my mind prevents an employer gaining a holistic view of a candidate (would you for instance hide A level results to prevent bias towards higher achieving candidates?)

If it works it works but it forces employers to be confident of their own recruitment processes. Also I am slightly wary of anything that could be construed as positive discrimination.

Hate to break it to you - they are often not really that interested in the school stuff! I rarely look near an A level when I'm recruiting grads.

I'd have thought the A level results on a new graduate's application form or CV would be pretty close to the degree subject and classification. You could scarcely avoid seeing them, whether you meant to or not.

Threads like this make me sick.

One of mine is applying to Oxbridge. She goes to a crap school which offered little support during lockdown and her A level lessons have been blighted by teacher absence, teachers quitting and getting covid herself, class sizes are huge with a lot of poor behaviour. She also has health issues.
Friend's son is at the local private school, he got zoom tuition all through lockdown, they have extra revision sessions in small groups, small classes without poor behaviour, an expert brought in to tutor them in Oxbridge interview techniques.

Friend rages that state school applicants might have some extra help, DD is getting support from a charity. Friend has no clue what the reality of state education is like for many kids.

I know two Cambridge educated people, both do jobs that would be considered a waste of their education on here. But they are both in jobs that make a hell of a lot of difference to the lives of others.

There are a few studies that show university blind selection processes aren't particularly useful because other CV cues cause class bias anyway, like putting rugby rather than football on your hobby list, Latin in your language skills etc.

@DahliaMacNamara

I'd have thought the A level results on a new graduate's application form or CV would be pretty close to the degree subject and classification. You could scarcely avoid seeing them, whether you meant to or not.

I couldn't tell you the A-level results of anyone I have recruited, not interested - I know what degree they have though. After they've made it through the first sift - the CV is of little interest - no one asks to see it, they want to know how well they perform in the assessments we set.

@Carbiesdreamhouse

There are a few studies that show university blind selection processes aren't particularly useful because other CV cues cause class bias anyway, like putting rugby rather than football on your hobby list, Latin in your language skills etc.

I don't look at their hobbies either for that very reason!

I hire for my team at multiple levels. When the job is more junior and younger people are applying, I do look at A levels if mentioned. They aren’t a deal breaker, but they are part of the picture. I’m not interested in hobbies, but I do look favourably on a commitment to some sort of service or volunteer work.

In answer to the OP’s question, yes, of course it’s worth applying to Oxbridge. They are some of the strongest “brands” in the world and offer an excellent education. However, as other posters have pointed out, Oxbridge can no longer offer places to all the excellent students who apply and would benefit from the education they offer. Generations ago, they might have had the capacity to contain all the “best” students. This is no longer the case. The “best” spill over into the next tier of universities who are becoming indistinguishable from Oxbridge in terms of student quality and odds of gaining an offer.

One city law firm Clifford Chance does this:

"The magic circle firm will tackle Oxbridge bias with changes that will withhold information about candidates’ university and schooling background from interviewers at the final interview stage, it has been reported.

The decision to adopt a ‘CV blind policy’ aims to ensure the law firm recruits the top talent from across the country and from a wide range of backgrounds; not just those who have [attended] an independent school and/or [had an] the Oxbridge university education.

Staff involved in the final assessment stage of the recruitment process will only be given the names of the candidates. In the preceding stages, the firm will also whittle down prospective interviewees by scoring applicants based on all types of work experience they have done – not just experience related to the legal sector." www.allaboutlaw.co.uk/commercial-awareness/news/clifford-chance-introduces-cv-blind-policy-in-graduate-recruitment

One aspect that I don't know whether is influencing anybody, but I confess is weighing on me, is all the recent information about the level of sexual harressment, rape etc at Oxbridge, and that Oxbridge seems even worse than the many of the other universities at dealing with this and being prepared to believe their students. I was first alerted to this several years ago when I went to lunch with a friend whose DD went to Sheffield, but she was down, and a friend of the DD who had been at Oxford was visiting. This friend had dropped out for a year because of some of these kinds of issues, and the lack of support and outright hostility she described from the university was horrific. It certainly left me with a sense that while I might be happy to encourage my DS to apply to Oxbridge, I was actually not that keen for my DD. Not sure that opening doors is worth those kind of risks. This stuff has now, finally, hit the press, and the Oxbridge attitude towards this stuff and their keenness for gagging orders is finally coming to light (the friend's friend was, I believe, subject to something similar, part of the deal to get any help at all, and to be allowed to take time out from her degree without penalty was not to talk publically). Made me very, very nervous about where my DD applies and whether it is sensible for her to leave home for university, because at least if she is home, I will have a better chance of seeing what is going on. I don't know if people are taking this into account, or it is just because I had this lunch conversation that many years ago, so everything in the press now just feels like confirmation of what I already had heard.
Admittedly this could happen anywhere she is away from home, but it really does seem like Oxbridge is more concerned about reputation than some of the others, who do seem to be being more proactive about it.

Just to be clear, (although it should be from the post), it was not the Sheffield DD who had these issues, she had a brilliant time at Shefield, it was her friend who went to Oxford who had.

But you’re saying ‘Oxbridge’, Wannago. Is there evidence that exactly the same attitude to sexual harassment or worse pertains at both Oxford and Cambridge?

My impression - hearing from current students at lots of places - is that Exeter has a serious problem with drink spiking and sexual assault, but I don’t know anything about university authorities response to it.

I wasn't too impressed by the behaviour at Durham by the posh boys running a competition to see who could have sex with the poorest student - I must admit it has coloured my view of that institution.

Most universities are in denial about the level of sexual harassment and violence that goes on imo. There are a few that deal with it openly and proactively, but there are an awful lot more who try to pretend that it isn't really an issue.

They are a bit like the church in that respect - all about their precious reputation.

@CountryCousin

But you’re saying ‘Oxbridge’, Wannago. Is there evidence that exactly the same attitude to sexual harassment or worse pertains at both Oxford and Cambridge?

My impression - hearing from current students at lots of places - is that Exeter has a serious problem with drink spiking and sexual assault, but I don’t know anything about university authorities response to it.

Well I was just jumping off the Times - www.thetimes.co.uk/article/oxbridge-resists-promise-not-to-gag-rape-accusers-7hhnl3br6

It is behind a paywall, but this is the first couple of paragraphs:

"Oxford and Cambridge universities are resisting pressure to sign a government-backed pledge against the misuse of gagging orders to silence student victims of bullying, discrimination or sexual assault and harassment.

Almost 50 universities have signed the commitment not to use non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) or confidentiality clauses to hush up misconduct on campus. The initiative was launched in January by Michelle Donelan, the universities minister.

Neither Oxford nor Cambridge, nor any of their colleges, which are legally autonomous entities, have signed the pledge despite requests from Donelan, student groups and campaigners."

Now I agree, my personal knowledge, via friend of a friend, was just Oxford, but the above doesn't suggest that Cambridge is exactly any better. I think I would want to know that somewhere had at the very least signed this pledge before my DD applies.

Thanks! I saw that headline yesterday and had meant to go back to it.

NDAs are such a major, major abuse of power. It is not just denial, it is actively silencing people with the threat that they won't get that prized degree (you know, the one that opens doors etc), if they speak out about the trauma they suffered.